HIGH COURT
BULLETIN
2007
No. 10 As at 31 October 2007
Section 1: Cases Reserved
Δ Indicates cases reserved since High Court Bulletin No. 9 of 2007.
Bankruptcy
Foots v Southern Cross Mine Management Pty Ltd & Ors (B26/2007)
Date heard: 19 June 2007. Judgment reserved.
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne and Crennan JJ.
CATCHWORDS
Bankruptcy – Debts and liabilities provable in bankruptcy – Legal costs – Second respondent successfully sued appellant, who was ordered to pay compensation – After appellant ordered to pay compensation but before judgment in relation to costs had been handed down, appellant declared bankrupt – Appellant ordered to pay second respondent’s costs – Whether liability for costs was provable in bankruptcy – Whether proceedings should have been stayed – Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), s 82 – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 72(1).
Appealed from Qld CA. [2006] QCA 531; (2006) 4 ABC (NS) 443.
Consumer Credit
Australian Finance Direct Limited v Director of Consumer Affairs Victoria (M53/2007)
Date heard: 2 August 2007. Judgment reserved.
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne and Crennan JJ.
CATCHWORDS
Consumer credit – Disclosure in credit contracts – Whether, for the purposes of s 15(B) of the Consumer Credit Code, a holdback arranged between a credit provider and a supplier of goods or services financed by consumer credit is part of “the amount of credit to be provided” – Whether, by reason of s 15(B) of the Code, the credit contract between the credit provider and the consumer must contain a statement of the amount of the holdback and of the person or persons to whom the holdback is payable – Whether payment by the credit provider to the supplier of a remittance, net of the holdback, constitutes payment of “the amount of credit” provided under the credit contract.
Appealed from Vic CA. [2006] VSCA 245.
Constitutional Law
Attorney-General of the Commonwealth v Alinta Limited & Ors (S331/2007)
Date heard: 2 – 3 October 2007. Judgment reserved.
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan and Kiefel JJ.
CATCHWORDS
Constitutional law – Judicial power of the Commonwealth – Whether s 657A(2)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“the Act”) is invalid on the ground that it purports to confer the judicial power of the Commonwealth on the Takeovers Panel, contrary to Chap III of the Commonwealth Constitution – Whether s 657A(1) of the Act is invalid insofar as it purports to give the Takeovers Panel jurisdiction to declare circumstances to be unacceptable circumstances which constitute a contravention of a provision of the Act.
Appealed from FCA. [2007] FCAFC 55; (2007) 25 ACLC 602; (2007) 62 ACSR 196; (2007) 159 FCR 301.
Blessington v The Queen (S218/2007)
Elliott v The Queen (S215/2007)
Date heard: 6 September 2007. Judgment reserved.
Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Crennan and Kiefel JJ.
CATCHWORDS
Constitutional law – Exercise of judicial power – During sentencing remarks, trial judge imposed life sentence on both appellants and recommended that they never be released from prison –…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read High Court Bulletin and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2007] HCAB 10
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In Attorney-General of the Commonwealth v Alinta Limited & Ors, the High Court addressed the validity of sections 657A(2)(b) and 657A(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), which conferred judicial power on the Takeovers Panel. The Court found that the sections were invalid as they contravened Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution, which vests the judicial power of the Commonwealth in the Federal Court and other courts. The Court held that the Takeovers Panel did not have the necessary characteristics of a court, such as the ability to make binding decisions on the rights and liabilities of parties, and therefore, the conferral of judicial power on the Panel was unconstitutional.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.